Reflections on the Peruvian labor system and the need for urgent change.

The recent reflection on the Peruvian labor regime highlights the inherent complexity of labor market competitiveness in the country. Over the years, the idea has persisted that any attempt to optimize this regime will face considerable political resistance, and in many cases, only a significant crisis could open the door to change. This analysis is not just an academic observation; it is a call to action for those seeking alternatives to improve existing labor policies. The COVID-19 pandemic, which has challenged and transformed structures at a global level, acted as a catalyst for change in the Peruvian labor sphere. During this critical period, measures such as remote work became indispensable tools that altered the existing regulations. This modality, although it had existed since 2013, took a new direction by establishing a more flexible and clear framework for both employers and workers. However, recent legislation has complicated this situation by adding restrictions that reduce the flexibility previously gained. Another crucial aspect that emerged during the crisis was the perfect suspension of work (SPL). Originally, this tool existed in the legislation, but its implementation did not provide adequate protection for workers. During the pandemic, the conditions that needed to be met for its application were strengthened, allowing thousands of formal jobs to be saved. Despite these advances, the Executive's decision to reverse these measures in 2021 left many workers unprotected, highlighting the need for a thorough and committed review of labor legislation. The creation of hiring incentives during the pandemic also reveals the search for innovative solutions in the face of a labor market in crisis. Through subsidies to employers, more than 342,000 jobs were covered, with a notable focus on youth. Such initiatives demonstrate that, although non-wage costs in Peru are high, there are effective ways to mitigate the impact on hiring and job preservation. However, the question remains: why wait for another crisis to normalize and improve labor parameters in the country? The reflection becomes even more pertinent when we consider that many of the current regulatory frameworks were established in a context that has radically changed. For example, the regulation on subsidies for temporary incapacity, which still relies on outdated criteria, needs to be revised in light of current realities. Additionally, it is essential for the country to question the distribution of profits and the possibility of establishing comprehensive annual remuneration. These norms, which remain in effect despite being inadequate for the current labor context, limit workers' potential and detract from their well-being. What is needed is a preventive approach that allows Peru to create a more efficient labor ecosystem, fostering productivity, quality employment, and ultimately, higher incomes for the working population. History has shown that crises can facilitate change, but we cannot rely on them as the only means to advance. The lessons learned during the pandemic serve as a reminder that labor work cannot be static. Academics and public policy advocates have the responsibility to generate ideas that maintain a clear focus on the well-being of workers and the competitiveness of the country. Now is the time to rethink and redesign Peruvian labor policy, not only to adapt to circumstances but also to anticipate future challenges. On this path, it is imperative that both the public and private sectors collaborate in building a labor future more aligned with new global and local realities.